Steve'sDigicams

TWO2956 · May 16, 2006, 1:20 PM

John,

GREAT SHOTS! I'm considering buying the 120-300 2.8 as I have found my 70-200 2.8 is a little short for baseball. I have a d-200 and I hope the sigma lens works as well on it. I also have a 1.4 teleconverter... Did you use your converter on these shots then? or did you take it off because it was to long?

JohnG · May 16, 2006, 1:47 PM

TWO2956,

I used the Sigma 1.4x TC for these photos. I can't honestly say if there is a performance difference between the Nikon version of the lens and the Canon so I can't help you there.

Here is what I can tell you:

The Sigma works very well. Focus may be a bit slow - by all accounts it suffers in comparison to Canon's 300mm 2.8 but that lens was twice the cost.

The only other drawback is I get quite a bit of CA - it's not pronounced until you look at a large version of the photo. But, there really isn't another alternative. And, as you can see it can capture some great results.

As for TC or no: There's no good answer to this one. Without the TC, the lens is tight (as I mentioned) but too short for decent outfield shots. I also don't like to make any changes near the field because of the dust so it's pretty much make the decision at the car and live with it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

May 16, 2006, 1:20 PM	#11
TWO2956 Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 79	John, GREAT SHOTS! I'm considering buying the 120-300 2.8 as I have found my 70-200 2.8 is a little short for baseball. I have a d-200 and I hope the sigma lens works as well on it. I also have a 1.4 teleconverter... Did you use your converter on these shots then? or did you take it off because it was to long?

May 16, 2006, 1:47 PM	#12
JohnG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 8,529	TWO2956, I used the Sigma 1.4x TC for these photos. I can't honestly say if there is a performance difference between the Nikon version of the lens and the Canon so I can't help you there. Here is what I can tell you: The Sigma works very well. Focus may be a bit slow - by all accounts it suffers in comparison to Canon's 300mm 2.8 but that lens was twice the cost. The only other drawback is I get quite a bit of CA - it's not pronounced until you look at a large version of the photo. But, there really isn't another alternative. And, as you can see it can capture some great results. As for TC or no: There's no good answer to this one. Without the TC, the lens is tight (as I mentioned) but too short for decent outfield shots. I also don't like to make any changes near the field because of the dust so it's pretty much make the decision at the car and live with it.